Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 June 15

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< June 14 June 16 >

June 15[edit]

A nightmare on elm street remake.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:12, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:A nightmare on elm street remake.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Melroserocks (notify | contribs).
  • The uploader says the poster image can be obtained from New Line Cinema, but it can't because it is a fan-made poster, it currently can only be found at a different location on the web which is not stated in the summary. Also, it never states the poster is fan-made when it clearly is ISTHnR | Knock Knock | Who's There? 19:39, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The image currently may only be found at www.aceshowbiz.com, which by the way, that website is currently blacklisted by the Wikipedia as spam. ISTHnR | Knock Knock | Who's There? 19:44, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Final Fantasy XIII - Lightning*.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Rjanag (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:37, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the discussion was Delete. Uploader gave permission for images to be deleted; image data (NFUR, etc.) was copied to User:XCosmoX/Image data. Further discussion about uploader's plan to create a new composite image can be continued at Talk:Final Fantasy XIII, and is not necessary here; uploader does not need local versions of the images to be able to edit them on his machine. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 14:23, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
File:Final Fantasy XIII - Lightning*.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by XCosmoX (notify | contribs).
Image:Snow Villiers*.png (delete | talk | history | logs)- uploaded by XCosmoX (notify | contribs).
Image:Final Fantasy XIII - Oerba Dia Vanille*.png (delete | talk | history | logs)- uploaded by XCosmoX (notify | contribs).
Image:Sazh Katzroy*.png (delete | talk | history | logs)- uploaded by XCosmoX (notify | contribs).
  • Four fair-use images of characters in an upcoming video game, Final Fantasy XIII. They were originally in a gallery in the article, but J Milburn and I agreed to remove them—there is no precedent for including multiple fair-use character portraits in an article about a game (see, for example, Final Fantasy X and other final fantasy articles, which do not have images like that; even Characters of Final Fantasy X and X-2 and Characters of Final Fantasy XII do not have such images). There might be use for such images in an article specifically about a given character (see, for example, Fox McCloud), but no such articles exist yet, and will not exist for a long time—the game won't even be out until late 2009 at the earliest, and even then there's no guarantee any of these characters will become notable enough to have their own article. So, long story short, these images do not meet the non-free content criteria because they are not necessary.
    Before listing them for deletion, a long discussion was had about these images at Talk:Final Fantasy XIII#Gallery removed. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 02:13, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Administrators, Please acknowledge that the Images are correctly licensed with correct web-based sources and descriptions. I acknowledge that the use of a Gallery formation may not have been the best way to put the images across within the main article. So I am willing to compromise with suggestions. Please do not delete until I have heard at least a few suggestions.
I am willingto compromise with any idea of using images in any way instead of the original use of Gallery formation.
Also please bare that the characters never had their own article, only a section on the main FFXIII article page under the section "Characters", of course the images had pages and this may have caused confusion.
The precedent in question was to give full reference to the characters from the text within the article to full renditions licensed promotionally by Square-Enix, I understand that the use of 4 instead of 1 within the main article (and also the uploading of 4 instead of one image containing all 4) would seem to infrindge upon the policies of wikipedia, but these are how the images have been released for these reasons, and to remain seperate to give individual reference to the characters in question.
Please respond promptly. The Cosmo 02:34, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Cosmo, you need to stop talking about "promotional licensing" unless you are willing to provide some real evidence. As far as I can tell, Square has not released these images for free use on Wikipedia, and has not published any special licensing terms. So you cannot assume that "the images have been released for these reasons" or that they were licensed for Wikipedia use. Just because the company publishes some images online doesn't mean they want you to upload them to Wikipedia. This is at least the third time I have said this to you, and still you don't seem to get it. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 02:41, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They were not published online originally, they were originally printed in magazines before being published online. I will now find a statement if you wish. The Cosmo 02:47, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please do; if you find such a statement, it would be helpful. I doubt you will find it, however; according to the FFXIII website, all the images are fully copyrighted:

All rights, including copyright, in the content of these Square Enix web pages are owned or controlled for those purposes by the Square Enix. In accessing the Square Enix's web pages, you agree that you may only download the content for your own personal non-commercial use. You are not permitted to copy, broadcast, download, store (in any medium), transmit, show or play in public, adapt or change in any way the content of these Square Enix web pages for any other purpose whatsoever without the prior written permission of the Square Enix. (emphasis added)

rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 03:16, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You've made a drastic Mistake. The statement you have just pasted here says "Website Pages", these images did not come from their website. The Cosmo 12:32, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't matter, they're still posted on the site, which means you can't take them.
Once again, the issue of discussion here is not, and never has been, whether the images are free (it is clear they are not). The issue is whether they are necessary and meet the non-free content criteria. Stop trying to distract. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 13:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think personally it is a matter of pure opinion that you don't think they meet the criteria, you've only stated that they don't seem significant enough for your liking and that it may infringe on Minimal Useage of Non-Free images, which in itself does'nt seem significant enough to remove them all completely. And it doesn'nt say that the images are free, you're making that up, it clearly says that they are not free, check the license. The Cosmo 13:34, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I never said the images were free, I specifically said they are non-free. I have no idea what you are talking about. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 14:16, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You've made a drastic Mistake. The statement you have just pasted here says "Website Pages", these images did not come from their website. The Cosmo 12:32, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, However they are on the website... and Square-Enix's personal information is guaranteed to always be more accrute than wikipedia's information and articles about them.
Plus since they are on their website that does mean your Copyright statement has a purpose after all (considering I recieved them from extrenal sources).
Even though they were being used for a similar purpose, it would take me a further amount of time to recieve a written statement (as my original has just been invalidated by Conflict of Square-Enix statements).
And since the images are widely available on greater sources than Wikipedia itself (especially since you were so eager to remove them with a dominant attitude? and from reading your history I'm not the only person who knows this. You have quite the destructive record, I'm surprised you don't have an award for that.) I hereby declare that the Images upon wikipedia be removed until a Future time when the Article "Final Fantasy XIII" in question has an Increasing demand for wikipedia information and knowledge uopn all factors and Charatcters of FFXIII in general, once their information has become highly significant to allow many administrators (even you, the rest but J Milburn seemed pleased) to acknowledge their existance upon wikipedia as a Fully Useful referable source which allow each Individual characters to have a Full Individual profile.
Please refrain from personal attacks. I have no idea what "destructive record" you are referring to, and you would do well to keep this discussion focused on content issues, rather than attacking other contributors. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 14:16, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As a Further compromise, the 4 high scale images will be comprised into 1 smaller attached Panoramic image which will replace the previous gallery which was Rejected. Which will also supply readers with a source to the 4 originals while maintaining correct position upon wikipedia without infrindging any copyright due to down-scaled, reduced quality and comprised of 4 original works from promotional and informational sources into 1 Panoramic low-resolution image.
If this compromise still does not seem to be agreeable upon your terms. Then thats Crazy. And would be a display of true stubborn misuse of administrative values.
You may remove the image on 16th June 12:00noon after I have re-collected data among the File pages.
Please do Not deleted before this date and time.
I have given what you wanted Rjanag, you wanted them out, fair enough, you were'nt the only one to express your concern, but next time, can you please come across as a little more helpful than warning most of the time, when I say "Point something out" don't just moan because you've told me in code what I'm supposed to be doing to resolve an Issue, I'd much prefer it if you supplied more links to helpful pages to help me with my Wikipedia Crafting Knowledge, you only ever gave me a few, the rest seemed more talk. But I'll let you off with that since I have to. But rest assure that when the time of Demand arises, they may/will return on demand. The Cosmo 13:31, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"When I see something more buetiful, only then will I let it happen." The Cosmo 13:31, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Cy60 en.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Keep - No consensus to delete Papa November (talk) 10:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cy60 en.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Neo ^ (notify | contribs).
  • I found these two maps while looking at the Cyprus outline page. While they are definately very useful, the similarity to the government issued maps at http://www.moi.gov.cy/moi/DLS/dls.nsf/All/98609FDF7BB587B4C22570E5003570EA?OpenDocument are just too obvious too ignore. While they raren't esxxactly the same they are very, very similar - I suspect that they are a slightly older version of the current goverment survey issued map. From what I am seing, it is highly unlikely that these were created solely by the uploader in 2007 as is claimed yb the copyright tag. Passportguy (talk) 03:12, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, Neo^ is clearly not the copyright holder. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 05:17, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neo^: This map may look similar with the government site, but it is definitely not the same. It was processed by me and it will stay on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neo ^ (talk • contribs) 05:34, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Well you will have to provide more than that. Are you saying that you created these maps entirely by yourself from scratch ? You do realize that taking another map and editing it is still an infringement of copyright ? Passportguy (talk) 08:06, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Further Comment : I took a closer look at the Green area colouring on "your" map and [1]. they are absolutely identical - something that is not possible if you created the map completely independantly. Passportguy (talk) 08:36, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, a similar incident with Neo was discussed at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. As I said there, "It seems to have been created by Alexander-Michael Hadjilyra, a Cypriot author and designer. This, his bio, and says he creates maps professionally, and reveals that he goes by the moniker "Neo_^" when online. Since User:Neo_^ uploaded the image, I'd say the tag of {{PD-self}} is correct." In this case, the factual material in a map is not eligible for copyright -- only the stylistic choices (colors, placement of text, etc.) I have examined the two maps carefully, and the green areas are not identical. Lines are displayed at different levels of detail, the colors and fonts are different, choice of which towns to show (and how to spell them) are different, etc. Even if you use a copyrighted map as a base (and I see no evidence that Neo did), it's only a copyright violation if you copy the creative content of the work, and the geographical reality is factual, not creative. We should be thanking this professional mapmaker for submitting his work here, not accusing him. – Quadell (talk) 13:47, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment' I still have to stand by my request. Even if it not all parts of the original map were kept in the re-touching of the map, the new map is still substantially based on the copyrighted map. While raw data is not copyrightable, style and design are and these two maps are too similar and in many parts identical. A couple of examples include the yellow dots denoting settlements, the exact size and form of green areas, rivers, roads, and built up areas, the fundemental colouring of land and sea etc etc. All of these are creative works and are copyrighted. Passportguy (talk) 16:40, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Cy50 en.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Keep - no consensus to delete Papa November (talk) 10:26, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cy50 en.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Neo ^ (notify | contribs).
  • I found these two maps while looking at the Cyprus outline page. While they are definately very useful, the similarity to the government issued maps at http://www.moi.gov.cy/moi/DLS/dls.nsf/All/98609FDF7BB587B4C22570E5003570EA?OpenDocument are just too obvious too ignore. While they raren't esxxactly the same they are very, very similar - I suspect that they are a slightly older version of the current goverment survey issued map. From what I am seing, it is highly unlikely that these were created solely by the uploader in 2007 as is claimed yb the copyright tag. Passportguy (talk) 03:13, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, Neo^ is clearly not the copyright holder. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 05:17, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neo^: This map may look similar with the government site, but it is definitely not the same. It was processed by me and it will stay on wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neo ^ (talk • contribs) 05:35, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Again the lines indicating altitude are exactly identical' to those on the map at [[2]], making it impossible that your map is not based on the copyrighted map. Passportguy (talk) 13:35, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The altitudes of regions of the island are factual information, not copyrightable. And examining them closely shows minor variations, due to a marginally different level of detail. – Quadell (talk) 13:59, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, as above. The creative aspects of the original map are not copied. The factual information is not copyrightable. This map does not violate the copyright of the original map. – Quadell (talk) 13:59, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment' I still have to stand by my request. Even if it not all parts of the original map were kept in the re-touching of the map, the new map is still substantially based on the copyrighted map. While raw data is not copyrightable, style and design are and these two maps are too similar and in many parts identical. A couple of examples include the yellow dots denoting settlements, the exact size and form of green areas, rivers, roads, and built up areas, the fundemental colouring of land and sea etc etc. All of these are creative works and are copyrighted. Passportguy (talk) 16:39, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Usman Javed in 2007.JPG[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:12, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Usman Javed in 2007.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Ujsheikh (notify | contribs).
  • Personal picture of person with no article and no mentions in any wikipedia article. Not useful for the project. WP:NOTWEBHOST Enric Naval (talk) 05:46, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete As this page is not being used on Wikipedia and not even on a userpage. Wikipedia is not a provider of free web storage space. The uploader made two edits back in May 2008 and hasn't been back since, so it is highly unlikely that this image will ever be added to any userpage. User:Passportguy 12:43, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Useless. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 15:15, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

28068-hi-nissan logo.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:12, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:28068-hi-nissan logo.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Druid.raul (notify | contribs).
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

StageESC2004.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:12, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:StageESC2004.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Turkish Flame (notify | contribs).
  • We have free images of people performing. We do not need this non-free one to "visually identify the stage". J Milburn (talk) 16:58, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

13ac4.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:12, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:13ac4.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Chokolate (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned, use unknown (lacking description) ZooFari 17:58, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

LittleBigTown.JPG[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Keep and move to Commons. Free image, useful. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 00:42, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:LittleBigTown.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Eitmluvr (notify | contribs).
  • Keep - It's free. I do not see a viable replacement (that's also free). So, until such time, being "low quality" isn't necessarily a reason to delete a free image that is in use.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:17, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, free and useful. – Quadell (talk) 14:01, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

AmitabhAnand.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:12, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:AmitabhAnand.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Dr. Blofeld (notify | contribs).
  • Fails WP:NFCC#1: This image shows a living person, and there are two free image of him in Amitabh Bachchan. Fails also WP:NFCC#8: The articles would be perfectly understandable without showing the image. Neither contains any critical commentary on the image. —teb728 t c 20:42, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Uploader claims that it is necessary to show Bachchan in various stages of his life, but our policies reject that unless there is something unique shown in the picture. This has solely illustrative value. (ESkog)(Talk) 21:01, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Amitabh and Rekha in Silsila.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:12, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Amitabh and Rekha in Silsila.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Dr. Blofeld (notify | contribs).
  • Fails WP:NFCC#1: This image shows living people, and there are free images of both in their respective biographies. Fails also WP:NFCC#8: The articles would be perfectly understandable without showing the image. Neither contains any critical commentary on the image. —teb728 t c 21:02, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Uploader claims that it is necessary to show Bachchan in various stages of his life, but our policies reject that unless there is something unique shown in the picture. This has solely illustrative value. (ESkog)(Talk) 21:01, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2009_June_15&oldid=1138516444"